In December 2006, a Libyan judge shocked the world and especially the medical community, by allowing six health professionals to be sentenced to death by firing squad. The basis of the sentence was grounded upon the claim that over 400 children had contracted HIV in 1998 deliberately as a result of these health professionals trying to find a cure for AIDS.
Those who oppose the ruling feel that the "authorities ignored a body of evidence demonstrating that the cause of the outbreak was the use of contaminated medical material in the hospital in Benghazi, and that many of the children were infected long before the medics even began working at the hospital," (Nature, par. 1). They feel that not only was the claim baseless, but the politicization is detracting away from the real political issues at hand. While this case is certainly horrible, there are lessons to be learned that Libya and the entire scientific community should act upon as, "the transmission of HIV in medical settings in many countries is a large but often 'invisible' problem," (Nature, par. 6).
On the other hand, the families and some political officials feel that the decision was adequate in punishing those they felt were to blame. In the perspective of Libya's court system, there was potential for a huge political web to be charged. In one particular instance of the trial, "the Libyan leader, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, had accused the health workers of acting on orders from the CIA and the Israeli secret service, Mossad," (BBC, par. 1).
However, most noticeably, the arguments differ over what can be taken away from this case. Is the moral of the story a lesson in human rights or the need to push for better health care in underdeveloped countries? The Nature article suggests that this is a problem that could be prevented from occurring again. Countries have offered monetary aid with the intention to assist countries such as Libya to help increase their ability to handle HIV adequately and proficiently. There is no standard way of treating HIV cases internationally, so is this case pushing the international and scientific community in that direction?
Or should those same communities be more concerned with the affliction of human rights in this case? Protestors against the Libya death penalty feel that it is too widespread in the country and the government is using it too freely as a punishment for misdemeanor cromes. Questions have arisen over whether or not the trial was fair and if the medical workers were given an adequate opportunity to be represented.
Which is the lesser evil? Essentially, this is what people are asking themselves as they wonder what needs to be taken care of first. The answer to this question, however, does not seem to have an easy compromise as recently the trial, along with the sentence it imposed, has been postponed.
Sources
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3689355.stm
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v445/n7123/full/445002a.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Good job on your first post, Lacey. I like the way you've summarized the articles and I also like the way that you've pointed out numerous issues this case encompasses. That said, I wish you'd zoomed in more on a scientific controversy here rather than a political, legal or ethical one. I'm not sure how to frame this case in a more science-y way, but perhaps you could have done some research and gone into more detail about how the viruses were transmitted and how the researchers were working.
Also, note that your link (well, it didn't show up as a hyperlink, but your URL) for the Nature article doesn't work. Be careful when linking to resources accessed through the library's web page because often a simple URL won't get your user to the same place.
Post a Comment